JILR 15/3 page layout

9/28/04 11:21 AM

Page 257

Jl. of Interactive Learning Research (2004) 15(3), 257-269

Educational Software Employing Group Competition
Using an Interactive Electronic Whiteboard
YOKO OTSUKITokyo University of Agriculture and Technology, Japan
yhoko@hands.ei.tuat.ac.jp
HIROKAZU BANDOH
Fukuoka Institute of Technology, Japanbandou@fit.ac.jp
NAOKI KATO
Tokyo Gakugei University, Japannaoki@bmoon.jp
BIPIN INDURKHYA, AND MASAKI NAKAGAWA
Tokyo University of Agriculture and Technology, Japanbipin@cc.tuat.ac.jp
nakagawa@cc.tuat.ac.jp
This article presents a design of educational software employing group competition using a large interactive electronic
whiteboard, and a report on its experimental use. Group competition and collaboration are useful methods to cultivate
originality and communication skills. To share the same
space, the same large screen, and face-to-face communication
with others is very important in a group competition. By
employing a large interactive electronic whiteboard, we canalso introduce the benefits of IT into this environment. We
have designed a group competition application, i.e., Kanjipairing software using an interactive electronic whiteboard.
Through experimental use of the application at two elementary schools, we confirmed the necessity of selecting competitive elements according to the children’s personalities, theteacher’s leadership style, as well as the potential to motivate
children to learn. Moreover, the children kept their concentration and the teacher grasped children's study processes.
Therefore, we have found that an interactive electronic whiteboard and group competitive software can be effectively
employed in classroom learning.

JILR 15/3 page layout

258

9/28/04 11:21 AM

Page 258

Otsuki, Bandoh, Kato, Indurkhya, and Nakagawa

In recent years the importance of the role of computers in elementary
school education is increasingly being recognized. For instance, the revised
curriculum introduced in Japanese elementary schools in 1998 stated: “Ineach subject, the teacher should aim to make the children familiar with using
computers and information networks in their study by introducing audiovisual and other necessary educational material.” In order to meet this objective, computer labs are rapidly being set up in elementary schools, andteachers are also making an effort to acquire and hone their computer skills.
Many schools are making an effort to incorporate computers in the teachingof various subjects, and several software systems in the field of Computer
Aided Instruction (CAI) have been developed to assist in this task. Many ofthese systems are drill-based or tutorial-based and show a varying ability toadapt to the student’s progress (Alexandris, 1998). More recently, Computer
Supported Cooperative Learning (CSCL) systems have also been proposed,
which allow students to collaborate with each other in a group (Strijbos, 2001).
However, little attention has been given to the role of competition in learning.
While an undue emphasis on competition may be stressful, a certain levelof competition is necessary to motivate and inspire students. If the competition is between teams, it also fosters cooperation among team members andpromotes improvisation. With proper supervision and guidance, the teacher
can also help with the development of individual students. Therefore, the students can get a sense of achievement and feel encouraged to study further.
Introducing the computer into group competition-based teaching reduces thetime needed by the teacher for preparation, which in turn allows the teacher to
pay more attention to the students and to monitor their growth and development.
The teacher can check the students’ answers and their results can be discussed
in the group to encourage the students’ ideas naturally. Furthermore, schematics,
animations, and other audiovisual material can be used to facilitate students’
understanding, as software tools for preparing such materials are now available.
The interactive electronic whiteboard has already been introduced forclassroom teaching, and has been shown to possess many advantages. The
electronic whiteboard is a large whiteboard with a pen-input tablet and an eraser, which work like normal chalk and eraser. We have already developed several useful interfaces for the electronic whiteboard [IFIP] (Nakagawa, Oguni,& Yoshino, 1997, Nakagawa, Hotta, Bandou, Oguni, Kato, & Sawada, 1999).
More recently, we have been working on incorporating the electronic whiteboard into classroom teaching to integrate the advantages of traditional classroom teaching and those of using the computers in the classroom [ACM
SIGCHI] (Sakurada, Bandoh, & Nakagawa,1999, Bandoh, Nemoto, Sawada,
Indurkhya, & Nakagwa, 2000, Otsuki, Bandoh, Kato, & Nakagawa, 2001).
In this study we focus on developing competition-based study environment
using the electronic whiteboard in a classroom. We believe that the use of anelectronic whiteboard fosters teamwork and face-to-face communication.

JILR 15/3 page layout

9/28/04 11:21 AM

Page 259

Educational Software Employing Group Competition

259

Towards this goal, we present the design of competition-based educational software for learning kanji pairs. We also demonstrate the potential of
the software by showing how it allows the competitive elements to be
adjusted depending on the personality of the students in a class, and how it
assists the teacher in directing the flow of teaching. Further, we studied theeffectiveness of the software in monitoring the learning progress of the students in their abilities to improvise and cooperate.
DESIGN OF EDUCATIONAL SOFTWARE BASED ON GROUP COMPETITION
There are two approaches to incorporating group competition in educational software. One approach is result-oriented and the other is procedureoriented. We feel that for educational software aimed at elementary schools,
a procedure-oriented approach, where the procedure accompanies the result,is necessary. Thus the teacher should focus on how the students approach,think, and cooperate in their studies. In order to do that, the teacher has toknow the correct procedure for studying each subject so that the teacher can
provide clear directions to the students.
In designing our system, the following issues are considered to be central:• To have an environment that facilitates group members working together and improvising.
• To have an environment that gives the teacher feedback about the methods used by the students in solving problems.
Since our system is designed for classroom use, the following issues arealso given consideration.
• The teacher should be able to run the class easily without needing extra
preparation.
• The students should be able to apply their learning experiences to later
studies.
Competitive Element
Each class has different characteristics as each class is composed of students with different personalities. An effective teacher must adapt an atmosphere and teaching techniques to the characteristics of the individual class.
In particular, it is important to adjust the level of competition in a groupcompetition-based educational technique. For example, in a class with awide range of student abilities, only highly able students may be strongly
motivated. This may limit other students’ participation when the software issuch that the clearly identifed winner is. On the other hand, in a class where
all the students are roughly at the same level, this same feature in the software may motivate the students to plan a winning strategy. This remark
applies not only to the students’ ability to study but also to their ability to

JILR 15/3 page layout

260

9/28/04 11:21 AM

Page 260

Otsuki, Bandoh, Kato, Indurkhya, and Nakagawa

cooperate, ability to think positively, and so on.
In designing our system, we deemed the following set of competitive elements that could be set depending on the characteristics of an individual class:• Displaying the winner• Displaying points earned in the game
• Awarding points to the team that answered first• Limiting the length of the game to a specified time or the number ofcorrect answers
Choice of Study Material
We considered two ways to choose the subject material for this groupcompetition-based educational software. One approach is to delegate thistask to the software. Such an approach, where the software plays the role ofthe teacher, may be useful for individual study software. The other approach,which is useful in a classroom setting, is to have the teacher choose thematerial appropriate for each study session. We follow this latter approachin our design because our system is aimed at being used in a classroom. In
other words, our design is based on the assumption that the software is justa tool to help the teacher in running the classroom, and all the responsibilities of choosing appropriate teaching materials are delegated to the teacher.
Displaying Incorrect Answers
An effective classroom teacher is always conscious of the level of students’ understanding. For this, it is important for the teacher to not only
make the students solve problems but also to explain their ways of thinking
in solving the problem. The wrong answers are often very helpful, for they
point to mistakes in methodology. Based on this information, the teacher canadjust the focus of their teaching to correct the students’ misconceptions.
The students can master this concept and then proceed to the next step. If theteacher skips wrong answers, the supporting software becomes a mere tool
to measure achievement levels. Therefore, to increase the level of educational effectiveness, we have designed our software so that it displays not
only the correct answer but also incorrect answers so that the teacher canmake use of this information.
Handwriting-based Input
Keyboards are often used as an input device for personal computers. A keyboard allows a trained person to enter data rapidly. However, for Japanese
kanji characters, an over-dependence on the keyboard reduces one’s ability towrite the kanji characters even though the same pupil can read them. In particular, in the elementary school curriculum, where writing kanji is emphasized to a great degree, using a keyboard is very counterproductive. The ele-

JILR 15/3 page layout

9/28/04 11:21 AM

Page 261

Educational Software Employing Group Competition

261

mentary school children are also not familiar with inputting kanji charactersusing Roman characters, which is necessary when using a keyboard. Moreover, typing with a keyboard is difficult for children – it forces their attention
away from the subject being studied and may even stifle creativity. For allthese reasons, our system uses a pen-based input method that allows students
to input kanji characters naturally as if they were writing it on a piece of paper.
Using an Electronic Whiteboard
The normal display of a personal computer is too small to be shared
among all the students in a classroom or for working together. A network
connection is one way to share information among the members of a group,
but working in a network setting precludes face-to-face communication.
Thus, a sense of physical presence and face-to-face contact normallyencountered during teamwork are lacking when working with a network.
Moreover, the teacher does not get visual feedback from the students, which
prevents him or her from adjusting the teaching pace appropriately.
For this reason, our system is designed to work with an electronic whiteboard having a large display so that the students can share the same working space in a classroom (Figure 1). We believe that the large display electronic whiteboard has the following advantages:• It generates a sense of team spirit that promotes cooperation andimprovisation.
• Direct oral and visual communication in close proximity facilitates
sharing of knowledge and information.

Figure 1. Using electronic whiteboards in a classroom

JILR 15/3 page layout

9/28/04 11:21 AM

262Page 262

Otsuki, Bandoh, Kato, Indurkhya, and Nakagawa• The status of the opposing team can be observed, which may encourage
team members to improve their strategy.
• Other children who are not participating in the competition can also
watch the status of the game, therefore, it increases the tension which
may aid in the learning process.
• The teacher can observe what the students are doing and can give themproper instructions and feedback.
IMPLEMENTATION OF A COMPETITION-BASED EDUCATION SUPPORT SYSTEM
Hardware Structure
We considered two approaches in designing a hardware structure thatallows access by multiple users necessary for a competition-based software,namely, to allow simultaneous access or to allow sequential access. We
chose to follow the simultaneous access approach for our design because it
is faster and hence more effective given the limited time available for eachclass. However, this requires that the hardware must support multiple user
access for working out the answers, writing the correct answer, etc. Anotherproblem that must be addressed concerns the display area, which is smaller
on an electronic whiteboard than a traditional blackboard.
In our approach, in order to create a large work area, multiple electronic
whiteboards are connected to a single personal computer that acts as a driver andprovides access to the software (Otsuki, Bandoh, Kato, & Nakagawa, 2001).
Although a conventional way of connecting multiple electrical whiteboards to asingle personal computer does not allow it, we implemented a special driver thatCOM port

PC(Multi-monitor
function)

COM port
electricalwhiteboard

electricalwhiteboard

projector

secondary window
primary window

Figure 2. Hardware configuration (employing the front projection type)JILR 15/3 page layout

9/28/04 11:21 AM

Page 263

Educational Software Employing Group Competition

263

allows simultaneous accesses to the multiple electronic whiteboards. Furthermore, the display area is expandable by using the Windows multi-monitor function.
Figure 2 shows the schematic of a projector type electronic whiteboardthat is composed of two electronic whiteboards. It is also possible to use
back-projection type electronic whiteboards.
Kanji-pairing Software
The kanji-pairing software is implemented to illustrate competitionbased education software usable with multiple electronic whiteboards. The
software is designed to emulate a classroom teaching activity in which thestudents make meaningful pairs of kanji characters starting with a kanji
character suggested by the teacher. The screen for the kanji-pairing softwareis shown in Figure 3 and Table 1 shows the functions realized with this prototype of educational software based on group competition.
Prior to using this software, the teacher sets parameters that determine thelevel of competitiveness suitable for a certain group of students. The teacher
also determines the kanji characters that are to be studied in class, and canStudent’s handwritten answer
The teacher suggests a kanji character

Student’s answer (after recognition)

The teacher sets up competitive elements
An initial state

Displaying answers
A later state

Figure 3. Screen displays of the electronic whiteboard for Kanji-pairing
software

JILR 15/3 page layout

9/28/04 11:21 AM

264

Page 264

Otsuki, Bandoh, Kato, Indurkhya, and Nakagawa

place restrictions on the order in which they will be used in the game.
The game starts when the teacher suggests one kanji character that must
be used in the pairing game. Each group thinks up a meaningful kanji pairthat starts or ends with the suggested kanji and writes it with an electric pen,which is recognized by a frame-based character recognition system. The software checks the answers in real time, and displays the correct and the wrong
answers separately. If more than one group gives the same correct answer, theorder in which the answer is given is indicated by the color of the font.
The work of the teacher is considerably reduced as the computer handles
the checking of answers and the evaluation of students’ performance. The
teacher can suggest kanji characters on which he or she would like the students to focus. This allows the teacher to organize the teaching material andalso allows students to participate freely. The computer can also check unexpected or rare kanji pairs by referring to its electronic dictionary.
Table 1
Functions Realized by the Prototype of Kanji-pairing Software
Based on Group Competition
Design of educational software

The function realized with the prototype(Kanji-pairing software)

Competitive element

The teacher can set parameters that determine ofcompetitiveness suitable.
• Displaying the winner• Displaying the points earned in the game
• Awarding points to the team that answered first• Limiting the length of the game according to
the time or the number of correct answers

Choice of study material

The teacher can suggest one kanji character.

Displaying incorrect answers

The software can display the correct and thewrong answers separately.
• If more than one group gives the same correct
answer, the order in which the answer is given
is displayed by the color of the font.

Handwriting-based Input

The software use of the electronic pens andframe-based character recognition system.

Using an electronic whiteboard

The software use of the multiple electronic
whiteboards

JILR 15/3 page layout

9/28/04 11:21 AM

Page 265

Educational Software Employing Group Competition

265

TRIAL IN ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
In order to evaluate the efficacy of the kanji-pairing game and the multiple electronic whiteboards, we used the prototype in actual classrooms. Twoelementary schools participated in this study and we report here on thisexperience including the comments of the teachers.
Sakurai Elementary School
The fifth grade class of the Sakurai Elementary School at Koshigaya City
participated in this study. The kanji-pairing software was used with one section of the class containing 36 students and one teacher. The students weredivided into six groups of six each, and the kanji-pairing game was played
between pairs of teams three times.
The students were allowed to use the textbook and the dictionary. The
teacher also advised students on strategies to work together in a group effectively, and their desks were rearranged to facilitate discussion among groupmembers. After the game, the teacher explained not only the meaning of the
kanji pairs produced during the game, but also gave their synonyms andantonyms. Sometimes the teacher also asked the students for the meaning ofa kanji character.
The teacher felt that the students of this class were rather good in cooperating together and, moreover, this spirit of cooperation needs to be encouraged further as it increases the students’ social and communication as wellas their understanding of each other. For this reason, the teacher decided that
putting an undue emphasis on competitive aspect of the game would run therisk of destroying the group harmony, and so the score was not displayed andanswers given late were also counted in the score. The teacher determined
the winner by evaluating the degree of cooperation and creativity withineach group. Each game was limited to five minutes.
After the game, the students were asked to answer a questionnaire. Figure 4
shows the contents of the questionnaire and summary of the students’ answers.
The teacher made the following five positive remarks after the game:• The class was taught more or less as originally planned and the learning of kanji-pair words was effectively accomplished.
• It seems to increase the students’ motivation.
• It seems to increase the cooperation among the students.
• The competitive element in the game fits the characteristic of the class.
• Everyone in the class could participate due to the large size of the electronic whiteboard.
There were no negative remarks.

JILR 15/3 page layout

266

9/28/04 11:21 AM

Page 266

Otsuki, Bandoh, Kato, Indurkhya, and Nakagawa

The students made the following remarks:• The game-like setup makes it fun to learn kanji-pairs and we want toplay more and more.
• We want to learn more kanji-pairs.
• The teamwork in the group during the competition was lots of fun.
Koganei City Dai-ichi Elementary School
The fifth grade class of Dai-ichi Elementary School at Koganei City also
participated in this study. The software was used for a class consisting of one
teacher and 28 students. The students were divided into six groups, and the
kanji-pairing game was played by pairs of groups three times.
Before starting the game, the teacher explained the composition of eachkanji character and made sure that the students understood its meaning. The
teacher did not allow the students to use a dictionary or notes etc., so the students had to rely on their memory of what they had learnt during the game.
The desks were rearranged so that all the students could watch how the gamewas proceeding. After all the games were over, the teacher classified andexplained the meanings of the pairs of kanji characters that were generated
during the game, and also other kanji pairs that did not appear in the games.
Finally, the teacher asked the students to write down all the kanji pairs intheir notebooks to consolidate their learning.
The teacher of this class felt that all the students have similar academic
aptitude, and they are quite mature so if the game were set up in a competitive style, it might be more stimulating for them. So for this group the timeof each game was limited to five minutes, after which the score and the winner were displayed. Late answers were not accepted as valid. The teacher
and the students discussed the results of the game and finalized the evaluation. Afterwards the students were asked to fill out the same questionnaire
shown with a summary of students’ answers in Figure 4.
The teacher made the following two positive remarks and a negative remark:• The class was run as usual using the material originally intended by
the teacher.
• Due to the time limit, the students sometimes wrote kanji characters ina wrong order or incorrectly.
• The competitive element seems suitable for this class. However, thefinal score should be adjustable to reflect any special circumstances.
The students made the following remarks:• Pairing of kanji characters seemed easier than we first thought.
• We were able to understand well the composition and the meaning of
kanji characters.

JILR 15/3 page layout

9/28/04 11:21 AM

Page 267

Educational Software Employing Group Competition

267• It was very relaxing to learn while having fun and laughing.
• Unfortunately, many answers occurred to us after the game was over.
• It was fun watching the other games also.
The second remark above also pertains to another software package thatthe teacher used to explain the composition and the meaning of kanji characters. Our experience suggests that this software incorporating the electronic whiteboard is an effective learning tool to support classroom teachingcompared to traditional blackboards and text-based teaching materials.

Q1. Did you regard this lesson as pleasant?
A. Very pleasant
B. Pleasant
C. Not so pleasant
D. Not pleasant at all

86%
14%
0%
0%

79%
21%
0%
0%

Q2. Did this make you interested in pairs of kanji characters?
A. Became very interested
B. Became somewhat interested
C. Not interested so much
D. Not interested at all

45%
47%
8%
0%

36%
57%
7%
0%

Q3. Will you review this lesson at home?
A. Will surely review
B. Will probably review
C. Will probably not review
D. Will not review at all

3%
72%
22%
3%

0%
50%
32%
18%

Q4. Did you cooperate with other members of your group?
A. Cooperated very much
B. Cooperated some
C. Did not cooperate so much
D. Did not cooperate at all

50%
39%
11%
0%

21%
68%
11%
0%

Q5. Do you want to participate in such lesson from now on?
A. Want to participate very much.
B. Want to participate
C. Do not want to so much
D. Do not want to at all.

81%
19%
0%
0%

79%
21%
0%
0%

Bold face = the Sakurai elementary school
Italics = the Koganei Dai-ichi elementary school

Figure 4. Questionnaire and results

JILR 15/3 page layout

268

9/28/04 11:21 AM

Page 268

Otsuki, Bandoh, Kato, Indurkhya, and Nakagawa

DISCUSSION
The comments from the teachers indicate that the kanji-pairing software
can be used in a traditional classroom using the material that the teacher has
already prepared for traditional teaching. In other words, little extra preparation is required from the teacher. The software also facilitates a competitive element by allowing simultaneous inputs from the competing teams,
checking the answers for correctness and displaying them, keeping thescores, and so on. The teachers also felt that the pairing of teams in the gameimproved students’ cooperation within each team. Moreover, the game setting made it fun and increased the students’ motivation to learn kanji pairs.
These conclusions are further supported by the students’ comments.
About 90% of the students responded that they were able to work together
effectively with other members of their team, and that the game increased
their motivation to learn kanji pairs. Many students commented that thegame helped them to overcome the impression that learning kanji characters
is difficult. Most students answered that the game was fun and they would
like to play again. Our experience also showed that the teamwork and being
allowed to use a dictionary and other material help the students to overcome
their natural reluctance and shyness and improves their face-to-face communication abilities amongst themselves and with the teacher.
In comparing the results of the two experiments, it can be seen that the students at the Sakurai Elementary School rated the software better than the students at the Koganei Dai-ichi Elementary School. We feel that it shows thatthe competitive element was set more appropriately for the classroom at the
Sakurai Elementary School. In the Koganei school set up, the time limit andthe way of resolving ties when both the teams answered at about the sametime seemed to be constraining factors. Nonetheless, in both cases, using thelarge display size made it possible for the teacher to keep track of the entire
game proceedings, and they offered appropriate encouragement to the losing
team by emphasizing the experience of the game rather than the result. Thus,
it seems that it is useful and may even be necessary to adjust the competitiveelement of the game to adapt to the individual group of students. In thisrespect, the software system on the electronic whiteboard seems quite effective as it allows adjustments to the game procedure as needed.
Moreover, our experience showed that even students who were not playing the game participated indirectly by contributing to the strategy, which
was possible because of the large display area of the electronic whiteboard.
To conclude, our experiences show that the electronic whiteboard is aneffective tool for running educational software that increases the students’motivation in the classroom.

JILR 15/3 page layout

9/28/04 11:21 AM

Page 269

Educational Software Employing Group Competition

269

CONCLUSIONS
We focused on group competition in this study and have shown how todesign educational software that exploits children’s inherent competitive spirit.
The kanji pairing game is one such software, the efficacy of which was demonstrated in this study. In particular, we demonstrated the usefulness of incorporating a function that allows competitive factors to be adjusted to suit the characteristics of the subject and the nature of students. Further, we showed that theelectronic whiteboard is effective for classroom teaching and allows the use of
educational software incorporating competitive and cooperative strategies. Suchsoftware has the potential to increase students’ motivation and foster creativity.
In future research, we are designing and implementing other educational
software based on a competitive strategy running on the electronic whiteboard, and we plan to evaluate them in actual classrooms.
References
Alexandris, N., Virvon, M. & Moundridou, M. (1998). A multimedia tool for teaching geometry at
schools. Proceedings of ED-MEDIA/ED-TELECOM98, Vol.2, 1546-1548.
Bandoh, H., Nemoto, H., Sawada, S., Indurkhya, B. & Nakagwa, M. (2000). Development of educational software for whiteboard environment in a classroom. Proceedings of IWALT 2000, 41-44.
Nakagawa, M., Oguni, T. & Yoshino, T. (1997), Human interface and applications on IdeaBoard.
Proceedings of IFIP TC13 Int’l Conf. on Human-Computer Interaction, 501-508.
Nakagawa, M., Hotta, K., Bandou, H., Oguni, T., Kato, N. & Sawada, S. (1999). A revised humaninterface and educational applications on ideaBoard. ACM SIGCHI 99 Video Proceedings andVideo Program and also CHI 99 Extended Abstracts, 15-16.
Otsuki, Y., Bandoh, H., Kato, N. & Nakagawa, M. (2001). Supporting individual and cooperative
work using scalable pen interfaces. Usability Evaluation and Interface Design, 1, 445-449.
Otsuki, Y., Bandoh, H., Kato, N. & Nakagawa, M. (2001). Development of an interactive electronic
whiteboard system with multiple electronic pens for educational applications. Proceedings of
ICCE/SchoolNet 2001, (pp.1438-1445).
Sakurada, T., Bandoh, H. & Nakagawa, M., (1999). Extension of the IdeaBoard for educational
applications. Proceedings of HCI International ’99, (pp. 243-246.
Strijbos, J.W., & Martens, R.L. (2001). Group-based learning: Dynamic interaction in groups. In
P. Dillenbourg, A. Eurelings, & K. Hakkarainen (Eds.), European perspectives on computersupported collaborative learning. Proceedings of the 1st European conference on computersupported collaborative learning (pp. 569-576). Maastricht: Maastricht University.

Acknowledgements
We gratefully acknowledge the cooperation of the participants and thestaff at Sakurai Elementary School and at Koganei Elementary School during the experiments. This research was supported by the Strategic Information and Communications R&D Promotion Scheme under the Ministry of
Public Management, Home Affairs, Posts and Telecommunications.